So much for the wisdom that comes with age: Boomers and the Silent Generation want war with Russia. The demographic groups least likely to serve in an overseas conflict are, true to form, the most likely to want to send troops to die in an Eastern European trench.
Boomers have a reputation for disregarding the concerns and struggles of others. It’s not that they don’t care, but they struggle to adjust their political views and voting preferences in consideration of younger generations. Selfishness is a most predictable characteristic of human nature, so some grace should be extended to older folks. They are focused on their lives and those around them, and understanding the experiences of others is a challenge for most.
But the boomer proclivity regarding Russia is dangerous. They are so set in their political beliefs (Russia is evil!) that they cannot imagine compromise—even if it means younger generations will die. And this too fits the boomer modus operandi: they make decisions that have a greater impact on other groups than they do on themselves. As noted in a previous article on boomers…
“From mass immigration, refugee programs, foreign wars, and irresponsible spending: boomers want it all. Why wouldn’t they? They are largely insulated from the consequences. They aren’t competing with international students for university spots or with DEI candidates for jobs. They aren’t bidding against wealthy foreign buyers for homes. They aren’t riding public transit beside unvetted refugees or living in low-income housing alongside illegal migrants. Their daily lives remain sheltered from the frictions created by the policies they champion.”
War with Russia is part of the same trend: older people support sending troops overseas and thump their chests with moral bravery, but they are not the group that will bear the cost of this decision.
Sadly, even the messaging from military leaders reflects this. There has been a notable acceleration of rhetoric in recent months, with both the British and French leadership appealing to public support for war with Russia. The calls for duty and sacrifice, however, are directed toward older generations unfit to fight.
Fabien Mandon, France’s army chief-of-staff, publicly warned of the need for young people to die in the east.
“If our country wavers because it is not ready to lose its children…then we are indeed at risk.”
Across the channel, British chief of defence staff Sir Richard Knighton made a similar comment.
“We need schools and parents to encourage children and young adults to take up careers in the (defence) industry…more families will know what sacrifice for our nation means.”
How strange that this call to action is not directed at the youth. Both Britain and France seek the support of the older generations, while making clear they will not pay the price of war—young people will.
This is classic political maneuvering: make moral appeals to a large voting bloc that will not bear the cost of the action being proposed. But this only works when the voting bloc itself is unconcerned with the fate of those that will bear the cost. Such a strange call to arms could only occur in nations that are accustomed to pandering to the boomer generation. Imagine if the demand for sacrifice was made directly to older generations?
“You must come out of retirement to fight Russia.”
“55+ individuals must cancel their vacations and report for military duty.”
“Army training now mandatory for those aged 60+.”
How quickly the views of our elders would change. Which brings us to an important principle: before supporting war with a foreign adversary, consider whether you, personally, are willing to die in that overseas trench.
Alas, too few of the older generations seem capable of facing this simple question. Instead, we see a reckless and irresponsible escalation toward a war thousands of miles from the shores of the United States.
We should pray that our elders have a moment of sober reflection before they send young Americans to die in yet another international conflict.